Gamma vs Beautiful.ai: Editable PowerPoint Export Compared
Gamma and Beautiful.ai both export to PowerPoint, but the editable routes, font handling and documented limits differ. We compare them on the same route and limits rubric.
Gamma and Beautiful.ai are two of the most visible AI presentation builders, and both say they export to PowerPoint. The practical question is narrower: which export leaves the text, tables and notes editable, and which one quietly turns slides into pictures or drops features on the way out. This comparison uses the PowerPoint AI Review Lab route and limits rubric, described in the method, and the results are part of the 2026 ranking.
Here, an AI PowerPoint generator is a tool whose output is an editable .pptx. Web-only decks that share a link are out of scope.
Verdict first
- Gamma fits teams that want editable tables and embedded theme fonts, and can accept a slide master that does not carry over.
- Beautiful.ai fits teams that will pay for Pro or Team and need the editable export, but must accept that animations and transitions are lost on the way out.
On our scoring, Beautiful.ai reaches 64.5 and Gamma reaches 55.5. Beautiful.ai scores higher because its route is an editable export on a trial tier, and it lists three limits against Gamma’s six. That result rewards clear documentation as much as clean output, so read the limits list below before you decide.
How we measured
Route carries 70 percent. Beautiful.ai’s editable PowerPoint export is restricted to paid tiers, but its 14-day trial exposes the full Pro feature set, so it is scored as a trial route at 75. Gamma exports on its free plan, so it also scores 75 on route. Limits carries 30 percent. Gamma’s six listed limits score 10, and Beautiful.ai’s three score 40.
All rows were retrieved on 2026-10-17.
Side-by-side
| Criterion | Gamma | Beautiful.ai | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Editable tables in .pptx | Yes, on by default | Editable PowerPoint export includes all elements | Gamma export help, Beautiful.ai export help |
| Export tier | Free plan exports, with a badge | Pro, Team and Enterprise only | Same pages |
| Fonts in file | Theme fonts embedded; Google Slides ignores them | Help says to install fonts if the device lacks them | Same pages |
| Speaker notes | Included in .pptx | Included in editable export | Same pages |
| Animations | Some effects fall back to simpler styles | Lost on export | Same pages |
| Slide master | Not included | Not stated as included | Gamma help lists this limit |
| Price shown | Not verified: pricing page returned HTTP 403 | Pro $14.50 a month on annual billing; Team $40 a seat a month on annual billing | Beautiful.ai pricing |
Where the export really differs
Gamma’s help article is unusually specific. Tables export as real tables, but PowerPoint does not support rounded table corners, so they come out sharp. Italic text is a slanted version of the regular font. Gradient headings can render as a single colour. Gamma also notes that Google Slides ignores the fonts embedded in an uploaded PowerPoint file, so the handoff to Google Slides can change the type.
Beautiful.ai’s help separates two PowerPoint options. The editable one keeps all elements editable, and the help says that exports will not include transitions and animations. Its add-in help describes a save option that exports a slide as an image. That image cannot be edited in PowerPoint, and the warning appears only in the dialog. A reader who picks the wrong option will send a deck of pictures.
Both tools tell you to install fonts. Beautiful.ai’s export flow offers a Download Fonts button, and Gamma’s export menu has an install-fonts box. Neither removes the dependency on the viewer’s machine entirely, so the check belongs in your handoff procedure.
Who each tool fits
Choose Gamma if your content is tables and cards that you will edit later, your recipients use PowerPoint, and you can rebuild the master in PowerPoint. The free plan lets you test the export, but the badge will appear on the file until you subscribe.
Choose Beautiful.ai if you need the editable export and can work on a Pro or Team plan. Plan around the lost animations, and keep the editable option selected every time.
Caveats on this test
We read the help pages and pricing text for each tool. We did not export a test deck from either product, did not open any file in PowerPoint for Windows or Mac, and did not measure how the layouts differ after editing. The limits count is an inventory of what the vendors say, not a count of what breaks in practice. A cleaner test would use one brand font, one table, one image and one set of notes, then check the result in the recipient’s app. That test is on the next-edition list.
Bottom line
For editable tables and a free start, Gamma is the easier route to try, and it carries the most documented export caveats. For a paid team that needs a clean editable export and can accept the lost animations, Beautiful.ai has the better documented route. Neither tool’s export is a substitute for a final check in PowerPoint.
Scores follow the method, and other pairs are listed in the versus archive.
FAQ
Which export keeps text and tables editable?
Gamma's help page says tables export as editable tables by default on every plan. Beautiful.ai's help center says the Editable PowerPoint option keeps all elements editable, but only on Pro, Team and Enterprise plans.
Is there a trap in Beautiful.ai's export menu?
Yes. Its add-in help describes a save option that exports a slide as an image, which cannot be edited in PowerPoint. The editable option is the one to choose.
Why does Gamma score lower on limits?
Gamma's export help lists six PowerPoint limits, including a missing slide master, rounded table corners that export sharp, and fonts that Google Slides replaces. Beautiful.ai's help lists three.
Can I test either tool for free?
Gamma exports on its free plan, but the PowerPoint file carries a Made by Gamma badge. Beautiful.ai's pricing page describes a 14-day trial of Pro or Team features.